kd7eir Loc: Tucson, AZ

Do you think Donald J Trump the nobody should have a Conversation with Donald J Trump the president?

Tex-s

I'll agree with you when you publish your public criticism of Obama for:
1) Extending 'executive privilege' to Eric Holder to cover his own backside from an open investigation of "Fast and Furious"
2) Not immediately removing Lynch after the Clinton-on-the-tarmac meeting.
3) Defending the IRS and its targeting activities against conservative groups
4) Using executive authority to NOT enforce i*********n l*w.
5) Using executive authority to NOT enforce immigration-agency policy (allowing sanctuary cities to not follow policy and law.)
6) Using executive authority to NOT enforce drug laws (allowing states to ignore federal marijuana laws and bans).
7) Illegally rewriting (or delaying) provisions of the ACA on his own, in direct violation of the Constitution which clearly enunciates law-making authority as a Congressional prerogative.

Circumventing the Congress is, lately, a regular occurrence.

WNYShooter Loc: WNY

Angmo

Well, based on the Law, Trump gave Dems a chance, then acted based on law that empowers the executive to take action.

Lawful action

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

Trump is treading on thin ice. For one, this a move that a f*****t dictator would make and if Congress doesn't stop him, the Supreme Court probably will, in spite of Squi's drinking buddy being on the bench.
Then if he's successful and sets a precedent, the United States can expect the next Democratic President to declare a national emergency on c*****e c****e, or mass shootings, or wh**ever it is they want because we've eliminated process.
Our founding fathers set up a government with three separate but equal branches and supporting this move by a President flies in the face of the Constitution and threatens the very freedoms we covet.
This is an attack on democracy and even his premise for doing it with that stupid speech about women being kidnapped and t***sported across the desert with their mouths taped shut is a storyline out of an apocalypse movie.
When is this moron going to stop and when is his base going to start to think, read, and pay attention?

Angmo

Ok, fella. Relax. Take a breath. Calm down.

Have you read the law? The specific budgets are even identified. It’s written by Dems a few years back too.

I’m confused why you take issue with a dem law that specifies any president is allowed to do this, and has been done so for lesser emergencies. Some still honored years and years later.

Can you be specific. Desired action to be taken by Trump, reference to the law and where it isn’t.

Why do you seem to support criminal trespassing? Do you lock your car and house up at all? Would you contact the police if you get robbed, kidnapped or family member was raped, tortured, murdered?

Do you understand the difference between criminal treaspass and legal permission?

Help me understand your thought process.

Don’t name call, deflect, lie. Use t***h and facts. Reference the law and discuss. Have you actually read the law?

Or is this just party line banter and name calling nonsense.

I did take issue when Obama did this, but read the law and learned the scope and understood the latitude given a president. Otherwise I’d sound like a talking head/ass leftie.

Angmo

Here’s an issue with open borders. Death. Leftie style.

https://www.abc15.com/news/state/f******l-deaths-from-mexican-oxy-pills-hit-arizona-hard

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

Trump negotiated with congress.

Mighty Nancy has struck out.

Angmo

Thing is, grandma Alzheimer’s never saw it coming. Nor the next day - can’t remember what she never saw coming.

No contest. She got Trumped!!

pendennis

It's also laughable, that the Dems accuse the President of not acting for two years on the National Emergency. Facts are that he worked with a Republican Congress which had no interest in accommodating the President. Ryan and McConnell both overtly worked against the President, and not just on the wall. It wasn't until the President raised a stink, that his nominations finally got moving, because McConnell insisted on the arcane Senate rules of 60 v**es on everything.

McConnell is running for re-e******n in 2020 from a state that's solidly pro-Trump. He risks a primary fight if he doesn't show support for the President's agenda.

The Dems know they don't have a leg to stand on in the case of the 1976 law. The Congress granted the President the power, along with the means of securing money.

There have been a number of articles written, which state that Congress has no standing in Federal courts, since they passed the law the President is using. They can't be an interested party. It would be akin to someone suing to get back a car they legally gave to another person.

There certainly will be groups which will sue over any number of issues, right of eminent domain, purchase of land, etc., will certainly be contested. However, since there are over 55 previous uses, most not even affecting the U.S. borders, Congress may just have to bloviate. They're caught in a real bind. If they muster enough v**es in Congress to try and cancel the law, they won't have enough v**es to override a guaranteed P**********l veto.

The President tried to work with the Dems, and they said no funds for any type of wall.

Read the book.